216. Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the arrangements in place where a report made or transmitted to his Department under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, as amended, concerns his Department's own functions under that Act, including the statutory guidance issued by him; whether a conflict of interest assessment is carried out on receipt of such a report; whether such reports may be referred to another suitable person or to the Office of the Protected Disclosures Commissioner; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [75266/26]

As the Deputy will be aware, the processes and procedures for receiving and following-up on a protected disclosure are set out in Sections 6 - 10 of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 (as amended).

Section 6A(1)(a), in respect of internal reporting channels, states that:

"(a) channels for receiving reports shall be designed, established and operated in a secure manner that ensures that confidentiality of the identity of the reporting person and any third party mentioned in the report is protected and prevents access thereto by persons other than those referred to in section 6(9) and any designated person."

Section 6A(1)(c) goes on to state that:

"the designation of an impartial person or persons who are competent to follow-up on reports (who may be the same person or persons as the recipient of the report) (in this section referred to as a "designated person") who will maintain communication with the reporting person and, where necessary, request further information from, and provide feedback to, that reporting person".

Section 10.3 of the Protected Disclosures Statutory Guidance refers to the form that follow-up action could take. It states:

"the precise form of follow-up that is appropriate to each individual report will vary depending on the content and nature of the report. For example while some cases may require substantial investigation to establish the facts, others may not merit such detailed follow-up as the facts are clear and uncontroversial. The follow-up action that should be taken should be proportionate to the nature, complexity and seriousness of the report."

In relation to referring a report to another body or to other procedures, it should be borne in mind that, apart from allowing for the reporting of alleged wrongdoing, the purpose of the amended Act is also to ensure that said reports are transmitted to those who are in reality in a position to ascertain if an alleged wrongdoing has occurred, and who have the ability to take action to address any wrongdoing.

I trust this answers the Deputy's question.